World talk - Page 3

TheSpiritOfVengance · 05-30-2004, 12:34 AM

Yes but we can only help them for so long... They say on tv "we hate americans we hate americans and bush!" and then they ask for our help. Something is wrong there. They can insult us to the content of thier hearts and we still must help them. Yes it is arrogant to say "Why should we care?" but there in lies the problem. We get no respect for what we do and whenever we try to do something good it gets thrown back at us like a baby who doesn't want its food. We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet a hundred times over, yet we are treated like a walking mat. Normally at this point I would go into a divide by zero all your bases are belong to us error tailspin, but I have gotten use to it. I say what if we ignored them? Maybe give them "tough love?" Yes it is mean coldhearted and more arrogant than an aristocrat to a butler but then, are they not arrogent and coldhearted to us? If we were in need of something (besides crude oil) would they help us out? I highly doubt it. So we just show that we are "better than the are" by helping them out? Yup. It is one weird cycle...

Omega Mage Zero · 05-30-2004, 12:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Omega Mage Zero
The Iraqis, by and large, didn't want us to overthrow Saddam.

Quote: RangerAidan -Wrong. They wanted someone to overthrow him.

-Wrong. If a large enough number of Iraqis wanted him out of power, he would have been. Even the most brutal dictator rules only with the tacit consent of the majority. Many may have hated him, but they didn't hate him enough to rebel. Many DIDN'T hate him, compared to other governments in the region, society in Iraq was relatively free. Women were not required to were veils and they could leave the house freely. Many women held important jobs, such as doctors. Compare this to our ally Saudi Arabia.

Saddam was a brutal military dictator, but he was a secular leader, not a religious one. Many people in his government were not even Muslims, Tariq Aziz was a Christian, for example.

Now Iraq is on the verge of becoming an Ayatollah-led theocracy. Is this really an improvement over Saddam? Are the Iraqis going to be better off? Is it the Shias turn to oppress the Sunnis now?

Omega Mage Zero · 05-30-2004, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSpiritOfVengance

Yes but we can only help them for so long... They say on tv "we hate americans we hate americans and bush!" and then they ask for our help. Something is wrong there. They can insult us to the content of thier hearts and we still must help them. Yes it is arrogant to say "Why should we care?" but there in lies the problem. We get no respect for what we do and whenever we try to do something good it gets thrown back at us like a baby who doesn't want its food. We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet a hundred times over, yet we are treated like a walking mat. Normally at this point I would go into a divide by zero all your bases are belong to us error tailspin, but I have gotten use to it. I say what if we ignored them? Maybe give them "tough love?" Yes it is mean coldhearted and more arrogant than an aristocrat to a butler but then, are they not arrogent and coldhearted to us? If we were in need of something (besides crude oil) would they help us out? I highly doubt it. So we just show that we are "better than the are" by helping them out? Yup. It is one weird cycle...

Other nations don't just hate Americans without cause, Spirit. You seem to be under the impression that the American government and our corporations do and always have behaved honorably and humanely. They don't. We shamelessly exploit other nations and run roughshod over their sovereignity when it suits us. That's why they hate us.

TheSpiritOfVengance · 05-30-2004, 04:17 PM

Good point Omega but try not to double post. And as for Saddam well mor like Sadist. He dipped you average joe iraqi citizens in acid you know. Really mostly anything is better then Saddam I would wager, and yes it does look like it could become a theocracy which isn't that good either.

Otaku Son · 05-31-2004, 12:22 AM

About Spirit's comment about us helping people despite they treat American's like crap...

That's because the Americans want to be portrayed as the good guys. The people who are there to help whenever someone needs it. They want the world to see us differently than we see ourselves.

Either that, or we're afraid that if we don't help, something like Pearl Habor will happen again, in which our not being involved gets us attacked and thus involved.

05-30-2004, 12:34 AM	#21
TheSpiritOfVengance The Glorious Number One Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wandering the Earth once More... Posts: 1,250	Yes but we can only help them for so long... They say on tv "we hate americans we hate americans and bush!" and then they ask for our help. Something is wrong there. They can insult us to the content of thier hearts and we still must help them. Yes it is arrogant to say "Why should we care?" but there in lies the problem. We get no respect for what we do and whenever we try to do something good it gets thrown back at us like a baby who doesn't want its food. We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet a hundred times over, yet we are treated like a walking mat. Normally at this point I would go into a divide by zero all your bases are belong to us error tailspin, but I have gotten use to it. I say what if we ignored them? Maybe give them "tough love?" Yes it is mean coldhearted and more arrogant than an aristocrat to a butler but then, are they not arrogent and coldhearted to us? If we were in need of something (besides crude oil) would they help us out? I highly doubt it. So we just show that we are "better than the are" by helping them out? Yup. It is one weird cycle... __________________ "Revenge is a dish best sereved cold. And it is very cold in outer space" --Kahn

05-30-2004, 04:17 PM	#24
TheSpiritOfVengance The Glorious Number One Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wandering the Earth once More... Posts: 1,250	Good point Omega but try not to double post. And as for Saddam well mor like Sadist. He dipped you average joe iraqi citizens in acid you know. Really mostly anything is better then Saddam I would wager, and yes it does look like it could become a theocracy which isn't that good either. __________________ "Revenge is a dish best sereved cold. And it is very cold in outer space" --Kahn

05-30-2004, 12:11 PM	#22
Omega Mage Zero Troopa Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 53	Quote: Originally Posted by Omega Mage Zero The Iraqis, by and large, didn't want us to overthrow Saddam. Quote: RangerAidan -Wrong. They wanted someone to overthrow him. -Wrong. If a large enough number of Iraqis wanted him out of power, he would have been. Even the most brutal dictator rules only with the tacit consent of the majority. Many may have hated him, but they didn't hate him enough to rebel. Many DIDN'T hate him, compared to other governments in the region, society in Iraq was relatively free. Women were not required to were veils and they could leave the house freely. Many women held important jobs, such as doctors. Compare this to our ally Saudi Arabia. Saddam was a brutal military dictator, but he was a secular leader, not a religious one. Many people in his government were not even Muslims, Tariq Aziz was a Christian, for example. Now Iraq is on the verge of becoming an Ayatollah-led theocracy. Is this really an improvement over Saddam? Are the Iraqis going to be better off? Is it the Shias turn to oppress the Sunnis now?

05-31-2004, 12:22 AM	#25
Otaku Son Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,488	About Spirit's comment about us helping people despite they treat American's like crap... That's because the Americans want to be portrayed as the good guys. The people who are there to help whenever someone needs it. They want the world to see us differently than we see ourselves. Either that, or we're afraid that if we don't help, something like Pearl Habor will happen again, in which our not being involved gets us attacked and thus involved.